Check it out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_Systems_Theory

I suppose this would go along with what everyone is saying that we affect the system and the system affects us. I’m still uncertain of how I feel about ownership, though.

Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves, or we know where we can find information on it. ~ Samuel Johnson

Where did I originally see this quote? I have no idea. I’m not even sure I know who Samuel Johnson is, quite frankly. (Didn’t he write a dictionary or something?) But I think it speaks to Erin’s point about ownership of information.

I also like Hadass’ comments about assimilation.

I am owning this comment, but feel free to use it.

We think in terms of what we know – all the while knowing that what we know is merely a fraction of what is known and what is known is only a nano-particle of the truth. The moment I perceive something as truth, I no longer own it because truth is free from ownership but knowing truth doesn’t set us free. It is the moment of becoming a truth that sets everything free.

How does a person become a truth? We become a truth when we make peace with all that is within us – accepting our limitations and embracing our gifts. Acceptance frees us from the binds of self-doubt and provides a center around which we can expand infinitely.

So yes, we belong to our PLN. The Internet is a form of the Borg. But as members of the network, we contribute to it and shape it to our own unique wants and needs. So in that sense, it belongs to us.

Reciprocity …

G’night, Hadass (lionsima).

Re: semantics. I always get frustrated with the expression ‘just semantics’. Semantics is the study of meaning… and I really want that conversation to be important. I am constantly of the opinion that most senseless debate happens when people don’t take the time to establish what they mean by a given thing. Words like good, true, personal, right, justice… these things are the lifeblood of our societies… we don’t really have ‘definitions’ for them… we have debates. We have a living discussion about what these things mean to us, and those discussions define us as a society. Presuming that we know what someone else means by a word is the height of arrogance.

In this particular case all the words are out there for challenge. Personal. learning. network. The definition of the latter, for instance, has very strong bearing on what you can say about the first. If a network is something that exists in the ether, disconnected and ephemeral, then, really, it’s pretty tough for it to be personal. If we define learning as something that only happens in a network (say, a connectivist) the conversation is moot, as it can’t really be personal, it can only be networky (or so i would claim…)

But, and heres the important part, if you’re going to disagree with my claim about whether connectivism can be personal, in the sense of learning environments, its critical that we stay having that particular conversation. A sport metaphor (however much i’m guilty of using them) is not going to include the premises of connectivism.

Belonging is likely going ot be different in a learning community as its different in a church or a rugby team. What we might mean by “my church, my team and my learning community” might be entirely different usages of ‘my’.

There are no end games in this, i think. One cannot say “there is no personal in learning environments”. The purpose in challenging the idea of Personal in learning network is to strengthen the debate, to add subtlety to our understandings, to point to the warning against assuming to much ownership. That helps the discussion… it helps that deep down subtle understanding of what we mean by our networks… it can’t settle the issue. A good idea is never settled.

In 2007, my rugby team won the premiership cup.

What does that tell you?

Did I play on the team? Am I merely a supporter of the team? Am I the managing director of the company that owns it?

Does it matter?

_MY_ team won!!!

To me it matters.

Because it’s mine.

I like the concept of members of a sports team wondering if the team belongs to them. How many teachers claim those in their classes are “my students?” I think this philosophy causes many teachers to truly engage students because the class becomes a PLN – including the teacher!